On Church – Part 6 (Equality)

What is church supposed to be? Should it be a top-down organization with a strong leader who runs the show? Or should it be more like a community center where everyone gives input?

Obviously, those are two extremes to make a point.

What does the New Testament say?

This is where things get interesting.

The Great Leveler

In Matthew 23 Jesus teaches:

But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. (vv. 8-12 NIV)

Jesus wants his followers to form a community of equals—they are all brothers. These brothers have one Teacher, who, presumably, is Jesus. They have one Father who is God. And they have one “Instructor,” which can also be translated as “leader,” who is Jesus.

One Teacher. One Father. One Leader.

Application

In what follows I will provide quotes from Frederick Dale Bruner’s commentary on Matthew 13-28, which I have found to be especially insightful. (I only have the Kindle version so I won’t bother to add the Kindle locations.)

He writes, “Jesus forbids the disciples to give each other honorary titles that would set them apart from or above others.”

Technically, Jesus only mentioned three titles that are off-limits within his community of followers, but those are only examples. The point is to avoid using any titles that set certain believers over other believers.

Bruner continues,

If Jesus is the church’s exclusive teacher, then all other favored teachers must be placed beneath him and all their teachings subjected to his. All Protestants must make Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Barth, and our other teachers subject to Jesus to be perpetually corrected by him. All Roman Catholics must subject their Pope and main teachers to Jesus, too. All Eastern Orthodox Christians must subject their councils and patriarchs to Christ alone. The mark of trustworthy teachers in the church is the measure with which they defer in their teaching to the teaching of Jesus.

If all disciples, without question or distinction, are brothers and sisters, and if only one exclusive teacher towers over them in hierarchy, then this text is radically democratizing. It is the single greatest leveler in the Gospel.

Bruner then quotes John P. Meier (1942-2022), who served as a Roman Catholic priest. In his commentary on Matthew, Meier writes:

The Catholic Church in particular must reflect on whether these inspired words call it to forsake the ecclesiastical titles which have proliferated in its midst, especially since one of its most common titles, ‘Father,’ is specifically forbidden to religious leaders.

Imagine if Catholics were no longer allowed to use the titles “pope,” “bishop,” or “priest.”

Protestant commentators, W. D. Davies (1911-2001) and Dale Allison, conclude that Jesus’ words are “a general prohibition of all ecclesiastical titles.”

Protestant scholar Ulrich Luz (1938-2019) agrees: “every naming that in any way distinguishes between ‘leader’ and subordinates ought to be excluded from the community.”

One Teacher. One Father. One Leader.

Titles of honor within the Christian assembly are reserved for God alone.

What do we call everyone else?

Jesus said, “You are all brothers.” If you have siblings, what do you call them? I’m guessing you don’t address them with an honorific title.

Bruner concludes this section with a lengthy quote from Davies and Allison:

Christian history has demonstrated that, whoever the polemical objects originally were, and whatever they might have done, contemporary application of Matthew 23 should target the church; for all the vices here attributed to scribes and Pharisees have attached themselves to Christians, and in abundance. While Eastern Orthodox bishops have, despite 23:6, enthroned themselves at the fronts of churches, Pentecostal leaders have sat on raised stages during revival meetings; and in the Old American South the pews were often ranked according to social status. Christian leaders of all stripes have, against the spirit of 23:7-12, bestowed upon themselves honorifics, including ‘father’ and ‘teacher’ and ‘bishop’; and of course many post-Constantine churches have gloried in pomp and circumstance, with leaders adorning themselves with costly raiment. . . . In view of all this, common sense and sound theology require that, even though this may be incongruent with the original function of the text, Matt 23 should not encourage Christians to imagine that they are unlike others.

For those who argue that church leaders and their titles were essential to the church’s history, even protecting it from “death by heresy,” Bruner responds,

Nevertheless, Jesus is Lord over church history, and particularly now over our part of church history. Therefore we should seek as far as possible in our time to implement Jesus’ politics of equality in the church. Even the “Protestant” gulf between ministry and laity is too great.

In other words, the past is the past; our job is to obey our one Teacher today. Intriguingly, Bruner even goes on to question whether it was appropriate for Paul to call himself “father” to the Corinthian believers (1 Cor 4:15).

Is there any evidence in the New Testament that a community of equals was ever practiced?

The Corinthian Congregation

Paul describes the gatherings in Corinth in this way:

What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. (1 Cor 14:26)

This verse has surprised many readers because it describes a meeting that is strikingly different from contemporary church services. At this time, believers gathered in small groups in homes so the meetings were intimate and casual. Instead of one or two people doing all the speaking while everyone sat silently in their pew, in Corinth each person in attendance had the freedom to share. That doesn’t mean everyone shared to the same extent; rather it shows everyone had the same access to participating. Everyone had the freedom to express something that would build up the church. (In Greek the word church is ekklesia, which refers to the people not a building.)

Conclusion

Jesus’ words in Matthew 23 are radical. Imagine a church that decides to no longer address their leaders with special terms, sending the following titles into oblivion: “reverend,” “pastor,” “priest,” “bishop,” “father,” and “doctor.” Keep in mind, though, this is not simply a verbal rule to follow; the goal is to protect the brotherhood under one Father and one Teacher.

Now if the goal of Jesus’ instructions was to place all believers on the same level, what would he think of leaders wearing special garb or sitting on stage or having a prominent seat in the front? Even a special parking spot seems to be contrary to the spirit of Jesus’ teaching.

Titles are gone, but what about leaders and teachers? Are they eliminated as well? I’ll dive into that topic in the next post.